Dynamic Range -- what it is, what it's good for, and how much you 'need'

Started Oct 17, 2011 | Discussions thread
boggis the cat Veteran Member • Posts: 6,324
Who is the real "ignorant entertainer"?

Great Bustard wrote:

While the ignorant entertainers posture with nothing but insults, I've been busy working on the discrepency between DxOMark's DR measure and Imatest's.

You've been busy asking for others to explain the differences to you.

A not so subtle distinction.

As it turns out, DxOMark measures what DR is defined to be,

In engineering terms. Now, that's quite unsurprising.

The discrepancy in proffering lower engineering DR compared to DR obtained from the processed raw file is still unexplained.

(The argument is currently about "Tonal Range" vs "Dynamic Range", and the claim is that DxO's results must be correct even though they do not make sense in some instances. Bob Newman is arguing a "terminological" difference as the root cause, but appears to not see the underlying issue: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=39659400 )

and what I've said all along, whereas Imatest measures the DR of a processed photo:


Which can't, by definition, contain more DR than the source.

Yet we do appear to have that result compared with "DxO DR" for FourThirds cameras.

So, just to make it clear to the cognitively challenged, I well understood what DxOMark was all about, but didn't know what Imatest was measuring.

No sh*t.

We're all surprised that you had no idea what we meant by practical DR , achievable DR , or what a photographer would consider to be DR.

The worth of the argument is immaterial, what is germane in your mind is that we are disagreeing with your point of view -- and this can't be tolerated, even if you are subsequently proven to be wrong.

But what makes this so classic, is that neither you nor boggis new anything at all, except that they gave different results, and that, in your little minds, automatically made DxOMark's measure of DR "bogus".

The DxO DR measure doesn't align particularly well with reality. Any measure that diverges from reality is a bogus measure when applied to real results.

Our "little minds" can't handle the contortions required to square that circle, Joe. It requires a special type of psychology to believe that twisting reality to fit an ill-thought through pre-conception is the correct method of "enlightenment".

It's one thing to be ignorant -- I was ignorant about Imatest, and am getting an education in the link above. It's quite another to parade your ignorance as a badge of honor, but, well, that's what makes The Entertainers' posts so entertaining, I suppose.

What I find entertaining is your complete intellectual bankruptcy, as in evidence up-thread from my post here:
(With supporting strawman arguments from Rikke Rask.)

Yet you make the pretence of lecturing others. Pathetic.

Back to ignoring you, I guess. A shame, as you seemed to be moving toward a more reasonable approach -- a facsimile of a normal human being -- for a while there.

 boggis the cat's gear list:boggis the cat's gear list
Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow